New French Anti-doping Law

Welcome back to WADAwatch, readers.

Since our marathon-writing sessions that ended in mid-April, Ww has been busy on many fronts, supporting friends and partners in related and unrelated endeavours.

Efforts to produce the Revised Amicus Brief, which was addressed to the 'Court of Public Opinion' (since we could not get permission to submit it to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)), which championed the increasingly-vulnerable position of those future Athletes worldwide, in any sport, who may be adversely affected by any appellate decision from the Floyd Landis case that supported WADA, the French AFLD, and the USADA, and their perpetual allowances of Laboratory Failures, have been well-received and generated significant communications.

As a follow-up, Ww offered Crimes against Sportsmanity, and the effect of these two massive research items remains to be justified, or otherwise, as the interested cycling world awaits the CAS decision in the Floyd Landis case.

Yet back to work, WADAwatch today offers a first vision of the new French Law on Doping in Sport, that is the first project offered by Bernard Laporte, the Secretary of the State for Sport, since he took office last October. A short article in sportBusiness.com had this to offer on the ramifications of the new French law:

Under the new measures, offenders will receive up of five years in jail and a €75,000- fine, when it relates to drug trafficking. The penalty will be increased to seven years in prison and a €150,000 fine when the offence is committed as part of an organised group or against a minor. If the offence is committed by an athlete for his personal use the sentence will comprise a year in prison and a €3,750 fine.

Interestingly, it appears that this law is a French political 'hot potato', as one could well imagine. As a historical aside, the modified law that was approved in the last week, 'improves' the 1999 law that was named for Madame the (Former) Ministère Buffet, who still holds a seat in the French Parliament, for the PCF party.

According to an article that appeared May 1 (in French) on the Sport.fr website, prior to the final approval in the French Senate, President Sarkozy's party, the UMP, voted unanimously for the law as presented to the députés. The opposition parties, including the PS of Ségolène Royal, former presidential candidate, and the PCF, all abstained from the vote.

Why?

Paraphrasing the writer, the lightly-attended Parliamentary session found the opposition parties denouncing (for political benefit or? legal substance?) a 'text of circumstance' that was urgently examined, and voted hastily into force, so as to be implemented prior to the Tour de France in July. Mme Buffet disputed the fact that Athletes could now be subject to Criminal penalties. Her fervent cry was to limit the effects on Athletes.

This was reinforced by PS député Alain Néri: "For the dealers, penal sanctions, for the Athletes, sporting sanctions."

So it's on record, that the new law in France against Sports-doping 'pushers' may have been created under pressure (from Whom? ASO, owners of the Tour de France?), and many legal observers know the fallicies that pertain to 'good intentions creating bad law'... but with a stong majority of Parliament seats, the UMP can 'bloody do whatever it wants'.


WADAwatch remains interested in this development, and hopes to return as more information becomes available.

WADAwatch is also reminding its audience that France is destined to assume the Presidency of the European Union Council; the pertinence of this is in recalling the 'sour grapes' thrown to the press by ousted 'former President-in-his-own-mind' Jean-Pierre Lamour, who fantasized the destruction of WADA, in favor of a 'competent' bureau that (Presumably) only he was capable of leading.

WADA, should not be unaware of the power of the French Media that supports its very unpopular president. Remember, that Lagardère Sports (A 25% owner of Editions Phillippe Amaury, which owns ASO), which bought the Tour of Germany is owned by Arnaud Lagardère, one of Sarkozy's best long-term friends.


"Eyes to the front; mark your target..."


Could this be IT?


The long hot summer?


After the Tour de France, hello Beijing. Hope is, that Mr. Fahey, now in the clean-up and forward-moving mode after the world sighed with relief at the departure of Dick Pound, is ready for the challenges that converge with:

• the Floyd Landis decision between now and June;
• the UCI v WADA 'wars', now that WADA dumped the UCI from its pilot passport project;
• the actions in Beijing, where an Olympian propaganda effort on EVERY SIDE, will result in a smorgasbord of potential 'violations', by Athletes (or a brand new Beijing Laboratory facility?), coaches, and others.

Watching the world, watching WADA,

.................@...............WADAwatch

2008 all copyrights reserved

In news unrelated to Ww, this writer is proud to be newly, and deeply associated to a young and dynamic growing association, the Geneva Institute for Water, Environment and Health (GIWEH), as Member of the Executive Committee.


As an Association formed under Swiss law, with an impressive selection of regional experts from the Middle East, the Association will be focusing on improving the health of all peoples, in the Middle East, through dialogue and projects, of actions and implementation of deliverables, that will take the 'talk' away from the work needed to improve the health problems of peoples with limited access to modern water networks.

Become a member! Our hope is to help the sick get well, by preventing the wells from becoming sick.

Disclaimer

The opinions expressed by WADAwatch are
strictly formed with the purpose of inciting WADA to adhere
to its Fundamental Rationale, achieve its goals and fulfil
the aspirations of its Signatories, in achieving the
highest possible level of objective, neutral
science in sport-doping control.

WADA post election "where are they now?"

Former candidate-until-he-forfeited, and former French Minister of Sport, Jean-François Lamour (almost wrote LeMond: heh heh), made a big REALITY splash this week, as he stridently opined about the violent protests occurring in Paris, at the occasion of the passing of the Olympic Torch procession.

But rather than interpret, let's read what the Daily Express announced:

"Bizarrely France’s former sports minister, Jean-Francois Lamour, last night claimed the flame had been “kept burning throughout”."

Looks 'extinguished' at this catastrophic moment in time, n'est-ce pas? It apparently was extinguished during some three different, difficult moments (one newspaper mentioned, that one 'protester' that reached the Torch, was a Paris City Council member... which is odd since the municipal elections already came and went!).


One has to wonder, a. why Daily Express was speaking to Monsieur Lamour, and not Bernard Laponte (actual FR Minister for Sport), b. where M. Lamour was located to prognosticate as he evidently did, and c. what value to proclaim something one wishes were true, and yet in spite of all evidence, evidently is NOT true?


Is this not the same man that assured the world, regarding the quality of the LNDD 'testing' (which actually was 'research' by definition) of the mythic, erroneous 'Lance Armstrong-EPO-1999' 'results' that were published by l'Equipe in 2005? As did Jean-Marie Leblanc, ex-director of the Tour de France, and our dearly retired Dick Pound?


Was Lamour not also the individual that claimed he 'had a right' to become president, and concurrently, that the nomination of the Honourable John Fahey would be the downfall of WADA?


Maybe WADA could 'investigate' whether an obsession regarding doping in sport (maybe LNDD would like to apply for a WADA research grant?) leads to some latent form of dementia...

Disclaimer

The opinions expressed by WADAwatch are
strictly formed with the purpose of inciting WADA to adhere
to its Fundamental Rationale, achieve its goals and fulfil
the aspirations of its Signatories, in achieving the
highest possible level of objective, neutral
science in sport-doping control.

.....................@............WADAwatch

2008 all copyrights reserved

Five Easy Questions for John Fahey

WADAwatch has certainly made clear its strong endorsement of the former Australian Minister John Fahey, who was openly elected to serve as the second president of the World Anti-doping Agency (WADA).


Given that the choice had nearly been between himself, and the petulant, acrimonious Frenchman, Jean-Pierre Lamour (who'd actually withdrawn his candidature nearly simultaneously with the proposal of Fahey as an alternative), the outcome was only mired by the European media's stimulation of reactions that 'Europe was robbed!' of some unknown 'right' to succeed to the WADA Presidency.

(WADAwatch photo, showing from l. to r.:
WADA Director General David Howman,
John Fahey, Dick Pound, and newly-elected V.P. Arne Ljungqvist)

Granted, WADA's existence was born in Europe, as an offspring of the International Olympic Committee (see Chapter ONE: Who Begat WADA?), and certainly European dedication appears to be exemplary, as it is the source of 47.5 per cent of WADA's working budget.

Next Wednesday, the 27th February, is the much-awaited Media Symposium with Mr. Fahey.

This post, is an attempt to bridge the gap between typical press questions, and those that 'should' be answered (IWwHO).

FIVE EASY QUESTIONS:

Donald Rumsfeld continued a string of insanely-funny quotations, in 2004, with the following gem:

"As you know, you go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time."

Question ONE:

Mr Fahey, ample evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, indicates that there is more reliance in the press as to assertions from WADA, on the issues relating to 'lab performance', than may reasonably be justified.

Eg: Chris Campbell's dissent in the Floyd Landis case, former UCLA lab director Donald Catlin's mentioning of 'false positives', or:

• a) the necessary shifting of B Sample testing from a contracted lab to labs not on vacation during contracted analyses,
  
• b) labs not appearing technically competent to perform isolated testing, and
  
• c) labs over 3,400km away from an event, being preferred to a lab only 18km from an event.

It certainly is a commanding task, to ensure that those 'WADA-accredited laboratories' have the highly sophisticated staff and training to merit inclusion in the family of WADA labs: yet are you assured that all that can be achieved, has been achieved?

Or are you content to battle on with 'the army you have'?

Question TWO:

With great fanfare, the World Conference on Doping in Sport (WCDS-Madrid) presided over the final drafting sessions for the newly-revamped WADA CODE. Several new components of the CODE have taken drastic steps to tighten the 'noose' around suspected Athletes. Whether such steps are or were necessary, their implementation does not appear to carry commensurate balancing safeguards against injustice.

If you come to a similar conclusion, through your own analysis or from future litigious events that provoke such analysis, would you initiate further redrafting, or is there no opportunity to reopen 'CODE revisions' until the next WCDS, presumably in 2011?

Question THREE:

As a follow-up to question TWO, one entirely new Article, 10.6 in the CODE relates to 'Aggravating Circumstances'.

WADA published a Legal Opinion, on its own website, in which the esteemed attorney-authors anticipated that "...judicial interpretation" would provide the necessary amplification to the words contained in the CODE. In a post from early January: "WADA: Aggravating Arrogances", this questioner asked WADA openly why it would make Athletes pay the judicial price of carrying the burden for WADA's inability to draft a fair and proper definition to the possibility posed, of doubling the standard 'two year' suspension to four years.

Mr Fahey, you now preside over an organization whose legal documents are primarily in English, and also officially in French, although the English edition prevails according to CODE Article 24.1 (identical in CODE 2003 and 2007).

There exists in the CODE, a definition of ADAMS, the WADA "Anti-Doping Administration and Management System". There is no definition in the CODE for "Aggravating Circumstances".

As a global organization holding the power to destroy an Athlete's career, whether such is merited or not, do you not feel that WADA should insert a definition of Aggravating Circumstances so that the Athlete is not unaware (in American law: 'on notice') of the potential stiffening of their potential penalty?

Question FOUR:

A cyclist recently, and famously, was suspended for two years, in the USA, from his allegedly testing positive for exogenous use of testosterone. That legal process is ongoing, and was prosecuted in the USA, under the auspices of USA Cycling, as the license-issuing Federation, and USADA, as the United States anti-doping authority for such cases.

That cyclist is currently (Feb. 2008) awaiting appeal through CAS, as is stipulated in the WADA CODE, the UCI rules and the USA Cycling rules.

In the WADA CODE, Article 15.4 demands that:

"Subject to the right of appeal ... hearing results or other final adjudications ... which are consistent with the Code and are within that Signatory's authority ... shall be recognized and respected by all other Signatories."

However, that cyclist was 'tried' in a second State, (See "Paths of Glori (-ous French Failure)" who was not the proper license-issuing authority, during the process that continues as this article appears (again, Feb. 2008).

What is the official response from WADA to such a 'double jeopardy' situation?

Follow up: Is WADA intending to seek an appeal from CAS that would render null and void this 'outlaw' legal hearing? And when will WADA re-draft the CODE to outline corrective notifications to such Signatories that are not respecting the CODE?

Question FIVE:

In the eight years since WADA's birth, it has grown into an organization of significant weight and stature. It has attempted to address many topics, and its heart and soul are at stake in the turning to your presidential reign.

One aspect that is not entirely its own fault, but certainly falls under its remit, is the aspect of 'retrospective punishment' to Athletes, who may be under no cloud of suspicion.

WADA has not, within our understanding, addressed the issue of retroactive loss of honours, medals or records, held by Athletes who may have innocently contributed to an achievement that is later revealed to have been at the hands (or feet?) of one individual who did cheat through doping.

WADAwatch points to the case involving the relay team mates of Marion Jones, in the 2000 Sydney Olympics. The remaining three Athletes, are now living their own personal hell, turbulently upset by the ad-hoc request from the IOC, through the USOC, to 'request return of the medals'.

Since there appears to be no easily-researchable rules that govern the situation described, is WADA going to call on the IOC to react, rapidly and conjointly, to this retrospective void in international Athletic doping controls and consequences?

+ + + + + + + + +

WADAwatch would hope that the Press that attend the Symposium next week (bienvenue à la Suisse!), are asking similarly positively-focused questions on the major issues of our day.

The opinions expressed by WADAwatch are strictly formed with the purpose of inciting WADA to adhere to its Fundamental Rationale, achieve its goals and fulfil the aspirations of its Signatories, in achieving the highest possible level of objective, neutral science in sport-doping control.

Questioning WADA,

............@............WADAwatch

© 2008 ZENmud productions

WADA in Madrid: News Item

There's a great, objective, hitting-all-subjects article from the BBC Sport site. Steroids busts in the US and Mexico, Marion Jones in tears, it's a must-read...

Read it for such insightful comments as these:


Wada to herald new drugs approach

While there appears to be consensus on the importance of this new front in the anti-doping fight, the Wada succession is more problematic.

At present, it is more like a coronation than an election. But there has been some speculation that a last-minute rival to Fahey might emerge from Europe.

Fahey was a late candidate himself but his arrival on the scene prompted the previous front-runner, Jean-Francois Lamour, to pull out in high dudgeon.

The former French sports minister and Olympic fencer also quit as Wada's vice-president but not before accusing the organisation of "not having the strength to fight against doping".

But many observers believed the real reason for his exit was a misguided belief that he was going to get a clear run at Pound's job.

An angry Lamour also said Europe should give up on Wada and create its own anti-doping agency.

BBC Sport has spoken to a number of key figures in the anti-doping world and all dismissed Lamour's criticisms - some pointing out that he had plenty of chances to voice them during his time at Wada but did not.

Watching WADA LIVE!

..........@..........WADAwatch

A Clockwork Naranja

As the hours wind down to ...... the commencement, Thursday, of the WADA World Conference on Doping in Sport, the declarations are coming fast and the press is siphoning them - for distillation at WADAwatch...

WADA CODE REVISIONS:

It is a living document, the first revision since drafted in 2003, will culminate with its acceptance by the Delegations of Signatories, for implementation in January 2009.

How do the various camps see this?

Dick Pound, outgoing President of WADA, as reported by the Deutsche Presse-Agentur (seen in the Bangkok Post), said:

"I am happy with it. The new WADA code is better than the one from 2003. We have seen what works and what doesn't."

But it is an interesting perspective, to wonder what Mr. Pound 'saw' that 'didn't work'?

There are ample evidentiary items that prove that the laboratories have not been able to prioritize global harmonization, but WADAwatch does not believe that that is the angle Mr. Pound reflects upon.

Clearly, as LA Times writer Michael Hiltzik indicates in his article, Pound should be content to see the changes that make the B Confirmation tests less stringent: their sole purpose, as a protection for the Athletes, has been diminished by redrafting, say Hiltzik and attorney Howard Jacobs:

It will stiffen the penalties for several categories of drug use and water down a key procedural protection for athletes -- the requirement that positive findings from an athlete's primary, or A, sample be confirmed by tests on a backup, or B, sample taken at the same time. Several cases against prominent athletes, including Jones and Kenyan distance runner Bernard Lagat, had to be dropped after their B test results were negative or inconclusive. Under the new rules, a B test would not be needed to confirm a doping finding if the prosecuting agency "provides a satisfactory explanation" for the lack of confirmation. "That's a huge change that the anti-doping agencies have always wanted," said Howard Jacobs, a Los Angeles-based athletes' lawyer. "The B test is one of the very few safeguards the athlete has, and now they want to do away with it."

Et alors? (And so?)

WADAwatch was brought online to monitor the aspects of WADA that would lead to the 'greater harmonization' that is frequently promoted by Dick Pound's frequent press conferences.

Greater harmonization would start, for most interested and thinking citizens, with aligning the laboratories and their performances, such that they build the trust of the athletes, innocent or otherwise.

That has not yet begun.

And thus, IF... an indication by Mr Pound that 'what hasn't worked' has been the, incapability of the WADA-accredited laboratories to measure up to the job, future sport arbitrations are certainly going to follow the path established by the Floyd Landis case.

Quoting Hiltzik again:

Landis, for instance, placed WADA's Paris lab on trial as part of his public defense, and succeeded in exposing a raft of questionable actions and what even the arbitrators in his case acknowledged to be "sloppy practices." The three-member arbitration panel ruled 2-1, however, that the lab's flaws did not invalidate its findings that Landis had doped with testosterone during the 2006 Tour de France.

As a recidivist laboratory, the French facility formerly called the LNDD, and now archived hierarchically as the 'département des analyses' in the French governmental agency AFLD, whose work gave new infamy in sport-doping control practices, has become 'le lantern rouge' without receiving a Red Card from WADA.

WADAwatch has previously wondered (see, eg: Pound POUNDS Lamour's laments) if the swift and calamitous departure of Jean-Pierre Lamour, former vice-President of WADA and self-appointed 'future president', had inadvertently broadcast his personal intentions to absorb the faults of the lab he previously controlled (as former Minister of Sport for the French government).

This leads us to the next discussion, pre-Madrid (where the Executive Committee has been meeting already).


The NEW President: Fahey, or???

Monsieur Lamour was flailed in the press, for his tempestuous broadcasting of his disaffection of WADA, soon after the announcement that WADA's succession was not yet a fait accompli. During the week of October 25th, notre cher Jean-Pierre was chastised publically by the very EU Ministers who may have been hornswaggled into believing that 'one of their own' was a shoe-in for the coveted non-paying (Pound received CAN $1./year) title.

This article was pertinent and sharp:

EU slams Lamour over WADA withdrawal, unsure on Fahey


There is continued discussion from Lamour, slanderously (perhaps?!) charging Fahey with a pre-ascribed agenda to soften the doping fight, and that he'd allow marijuana (credit to Hiltzik article again); whatever possesses a man-on-a-failed-mission to react so viperously? According to Hiltzik Lamour has charged that:

Fahey is fronting for New Zealand officials who want to remove marijuana and other recreational drugs from the prohibited list. Fahey calls the charge "nonsensical."

Thank the stars that someone as calm and forceful as a leader, Jacques Roggé of the International Olympic Committee, has had a chance to calm the waters.

He had this to say, reported by AFP, carried by The Australian:

Nevertheless, Fahey is backed by arguably the most powerful man in world sport, the IOC president Jacques Rogge.

"He will do a good job and will have the support of the Olympic movement," said Rogge last week.

"Mr Fahey deserves to be given the time to show what he can do. His election is not in any doubt and will not affect WADA's credibility."

Somehow, however, WADAwatch presumes that WADA, and Jacques Roggé, will be happier not to have to respond to reporters' questions about statements like this:

The former Olympic swimmer, however, was not intimidated. His confrontational style and sometimes controversial comments kept the anti-doping fight in the headlines.

"There are a significant number of people who think I might be a complete asshole and they could be right," Pound told Reuters. "But I really don't care if I piss people off. It (doping) is the most important gut issue for sport right now."

So, in Madrid, WADA could walk away from its Clockwork NARANJA past, to enjoin the issue of whether the accredited laboratories are going to receive a call for more harmonized science in their testing efforts, while both Athletes and recalcitrant Federations are being more stringently controlled, becomes the issue du jour.


Can WADA save itself, and will former governmental Minister Fahey render this family of diverse interested organizations into a less-bellicose, and more objectively neutral and scientific era?


Athletes, Laboratory Directors, attorneys and others are...


Watching WADA

..........@..........WADAwatch

Pound POUNDS Lamour's Laments

This post had been delayed...

... until the perfect title came to ZENmud production's inner sanctum...

At the WADA-AMA website, a full page of 'discussion points' was published, regarding the now-widely-known departure of Jean-François Lamour from WADAworld. It has all the barbeque-sauce flavor of typical Dick Pound statements, so one could imagine that the Attorney-President of WADA drafted these himself.

For the interests of archiving a vital point not to be lost if future collegial activity prompts its departure from the WADA site, WADAwatch publishes this public information in its entirety, with some points emphasized by color-shifts:

In a press conference on October 16, 2007, Jean-François Lamour announced his withdrawal from the race for WADA president and his resignation as its Vice President. In response to the attacks that Mr. Lamour has made on WADA, its current leadership and the process by which the next president will be selected, I wish to clarify the following facts:

1. WADA’s statutes are clear and have been firmly adhered to throughout the process for nominating the Agency’s next president.

   • The World Anti-Doing Agency is an equal partnership between the Sport Movement and Governments of the world.

   • The principle of rotation between the Sport Movement and Governments in holding the leadership position of WADA is formalized in WADA Statutes:

     • Article 7, paragraph 2: the position of WADA president is held on an alternating basis by a representative of the Olympic Movement and a representative of the public authorities

     • Article 7, paragraph 3: the president and the vice-president must be “nominated” by the Olympic Movement or the public authorities

   • The WADA Statutes do not contain any other rules in respect to how each entity (the Olympic Movement on the one hand, and the public authorities on the other) “nominate” their respective positions.

   • It is therefore up to the public authorities, and the Olympic Movement, to designate, in accordance with their own methods or protocols, the candidate or candidates to be appointed president and vice-president, representing the public authorities or the Olympic Movement, in accordance with article 7, paragraph 2 of the Statutes.

   • As previously agreed between the Sport Movement and Governments, and in accordance with the principle of rotation in WADA’s statutes, I, a representative of the Sport Movement, will step down from my position as WADA President at the end of my third term on December 31, 2007, to allow governments to hold the leadership position.
     

2. Nowhere in WADA’s statutes or policies is it stated (or assumed) that the WADA Vice President will automatically become the President of WADA.

   • While Mr. Lamour had been selected by government members of WADA’s Foundation Board in November 2006 to serve as the government representative in the position of WADA Vice President for the calendar year 2007, there was no guarantee that the governments, which are represented on the WADA Foundation Board on a continental basis, would nominate him as their sole candidate to WADA’s presidency.
     

3. WADA received two nominations from governments for WADA president within the designated deadline for nominations (September 20, 2007): Jean-François Lamour (France) and John Fahey (Australia).

   • WADA did not partake in any process development leading to a “primary.” Rather the governments met to discuss how they would select one of the two nominees to be the representative from public authorities to be put forward as president.

   • Mr. Lamour’s suggestion that there is an “anglo-saxon” conspiracy against him is incorrect, inappropriate and neglects the fact that represented in the decision-making are representatives of all five continents.
     

4. Governments have been entirely responsible for nominations and the process for electing a representative to be put forward as President.

   • Mr. Lamour’s suggestion that WADA management and I have been involved in the discussions on the election of the future WADA president is completely false and defamatory in nature.
     

5. Mr. Lamour’s withdrawal from the government selection process indicates his unwillingness to participate in a democratic process decided by the Governments themselves.

   • Mr. Lamour has confused “lobbies” with the simple democratic process of elections.

   • If Mr. Lamour is unable or unwilling to campaign to convince the governments (whom he was supposed to be representing in his position - until his resignation - as WADA Vice President) that he should continue to represent them as WADA’s next president, then perhaps he is not the right person to be entrusted with the leadership.
     

6. Lamour’s criticism of WADA is unfounded.

   • He has served on the Foundation Board and Executive Committee since 2005, and has served as its vice president for one year.

   • Not once during that time has he raised any concerns about the leadership and direction of the fight against doping that had been led by WADA.

   • His sudden about-face in his public enunciations regarding WADA is astounding, unfortunate and suspect, in view of his previous support and commitment.

   • The whole purpose to this international agency is to harmonize rules and policies, yet Lamour’s recent proposals go counter to the entire premise behind the organization of which he was an active vice president until his resignation this week.

   • Mr. Lamour's claim that his withdrawal is a set back for WADA and the fight against doping is a most unfortunate and ill-considered comment. It is difficult to comprehend how the significant advances in harmonization, research and education in the fight against doping in sport, led by WADA Committees and effected by WADA management, under the direction of the WADA Executive Commitee and Foundation Board should cease or alter as a result of Mr. Lamour's precipitate change of mind, in the face of an electoral challenge.

Click here for the correspondence between Mr. Lamour and Mr. Pound.

+ + + + + +

IT is chilling to witness implosions at an International Nongovernmental Organization of such weight as WADA carries in the sporting world.

WADAwatch can only hope that the presidency of John Fahey, if elected as apparently there are no other candidates to present themselves, will sooth the turbulent WADAwaters, and aid WADAwatch to promote consistency in science and legal practice, within the world of doping and sport.

Watch WADA

..........@..........WADAwatch

Week of 22-26 October News Wrap-up

A busy week professionally at ZENmud Productions, so here are some headlines that shouldn't be missed:

The Guardian reports on the EU sport ministers' regard for the abrupt resignation (as candidate for President of WADA, and as current Vice-president of same):

EU slams Lamour over WADA withdrawal, unsure on Fahey

LISBON, Oct 25 (Reuters) - European Union sports ministers criticised Frenchman Jean-Francois Lamour on Thursday over his decision to withdraw from the race to become president of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). The 27 ministers also failed to give their backing to Australia's John Fahey who is now the only candidate for the top anti-doping post, due to be voted on next month.

Headlines speak for themselves sometimes:

Dick Pound assails Jean-Francois Lamour after withdrawal from WADA presidential race

Associated Press Sports
Updated: 12:22 p.m. ET Oct. 19, 2007

LONDON (AP) -World Anti-Doping Agency chief Dick Pound accused former French sports minister Jean-Francois Lamour of making "false and defamatory'' remarks when he announced his withdrawal as a candidate for president of the body.

Pound issued a sharply worded statement Friday rebutting Lamour's attacks on WADA following his decision to resign as a vice president of the agency and pull out of the presidential election.

"If Mr. Lamour is unable or unwilling to campaign to convince the governments ... that he should continue to represent them as WADA's next president, then perhaps he is not the right person to be entrusted with the leadership,'' Pound said...

In another subject, with a not-very-clear headline, Reuters reports (As carried by MSNBC) that the EU Sports Ministers have a mission to take on and improve their national legislations regarding doping in sport:

EU warns states over implementing anti-doping laws

By Darren Ennis
Reuters
Updated: 8:18 a.m. ET Oct. 25, 2007

LISBON - European countries who do not sign up to anti-doping laws by the end of 2008 should not be allowed to bid for major international sports events such as the Olympics, European Union sports ministers agreed on Thursday.

A World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) report in April said 23 European states had still not signed up to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation convention.

[Ed. note: WADAwatch is aware of this WADA report from MAY 2007, with an effective date of April 12, 2007, that has a table for each region or continent's status as to signing the UNESCO treaty; it is unclear if that is the 'April report' to which Mr. Ennis refers...]


Silence reigns now on the Iban Mayo 'Hold the Mayo' testing results, as were the subject of these prior WADAwatch posts:

• The LAST STRAW in France... the Iban Mayo case (23 October, 2007)

• Is French Lab in Breach of Contract???

• Mayo and the LNDD 'Breach of Contract' (both from 24 October, 2007)

• Was the French Lab ... ON STRIKE? (25 October, 2007)
  

Lastly, sister publication crystelZENmud is preparing to publish the rather bleak results that have been received for its Questionnaire for WADA Labs 2007, which does not bode well for any rational redrafting of the WADA CODE and its subsidiary Laboratory and Testing documents. Scheduled for 1 November, 2007, that publication is surely going to be influencing the International Federations that are Signatories to the WADA system.

Watch WADA

..........@..........WADAwatch

Les Surprises d'Octobre

This post is carried simultaneously at

WADAwatch.blogspot.com and crystelZENmud.blogspot.com

+ + + + + +

What a week we'll be witnessing, from outside closed doors...

Conclusion? A Mirror...

In the heart of France, on the 22^nd and 23^rd of October, the French Minister for Sport and Youth, Madame-Docteur Roselyne Bachelot-Narquin, is going to be cracking heads, or hearts, as she hosts within the walls of the French Committé Olympique, a closed-door 'High Level Summit on Doping in Cycling”.

As meager as the press coverage has been, attendance is apparently limited to officials representiing: WADA, cycling's three Grand Tours (Giro d'Italia, Tour de France (owned by the group ASO), Vuelta de Espagne), the French Cycling Federation, the Agence Française du Lutte contre le Dopage (AFLD), and 'others', perhaps of European governments, the IOC, etc. Some 150 total participants should be sipping Evian or a fine Bordeaux, while discussing the ramifications of certain contrasting actions that have been digested over this last amazing year of 2007.

A snapshot of noteworthy items would have to include:

a: the ASO-instigated fight against inclusion of the UCI ProTour team UNIBET.com in the lineup of teams competing in the spring race 'Paris-Nice';

b: the revelations produced in the Floyd Landis hearings, from his allegedly positive 2006 TdF test for testosterone use, which implicated the French testing lab LNDD for its multitudinous lapses, in the application of standard international rules defining sports-doping test procedures;

c: the pre-Tour de France exclusion of Jan Ullrich and Ivan Basso, as a result of lingering suspicions centered on the curious Operacion Puerto affair in Spain, and its attention on the career of Dr. Fuentes;

d: the tardy (yet hope-filled) confessions of Bjarne Riis and Erik Zabel, of their EPO use in 1996, while under the Deutsche Telekom team colors;

e: the near-daily revelations, during the second and third weeks of the 2007 Tour de France, of rider's pre-Tour infractions, such as Michael Rasmussen, the Danish racer who wore the Yellow Jersey, accused of missing mandated testing procedures by the infraction of not informing the Union Cycliste Internationale of his pre-Tour whereabouts, the properly-delayed but annoying (to Tour director Christian Prudhomme, and ASO president Patrice Clerc) announcement of German rider Patrik Sinkewitz' positive test for testosterone, another in-Tour test for blood transfusion, that was brought against Kazakh rider Alexandre Vinokourov, then another positive test, which implicated an Italian rider for a French cycling team – Cristian Moreni – and for all of these envenomed the excruciating relations between the TdF/ASO and the UCI

f: recent news that the French Agency AFLD would reinstate its own litigation against Floyd Landis, creating an unprecedented and highly suspect 'double jeopardy' situation of two sports-arbitration cases for one test at one event under one set of (UCI) rules, due to the potentially-devastating news that the next year's Tour de France may not be run under the auspices of the UCI.

+ + + + + +

So once again, this week?


Monday and Tuesday, the above-named players will be meeting for their closed-door session, in the midst of other unfolding news-items.

The biggest one on the sports-doping radar screen, come from the sour-grapes pronouncements of Jean-Pierre Lamour, who's anticipated reign as the Second 'Grand Inquisitor' of WADA (succeeding President Dick Pound of Canada) was nixed by a considerable candidate's presentation: former Australian government Minister John Fahey, whose candidature was abruptly promoted by a meeting of the WADA Executive Committee nearly a month ago.


Lamour will probably be there; whether Fahey is invited remains to be seen.

Monsieur Lamour, apparently as cocky as was Dick Pound during the greater part of his reign, let fly a few news-IED bombs as loud as the door he slammed against his own backside. Insinuations he offered included hints that WADA was taking a 'ten year leap backward', that 'WADA was about to open the door to greater 'flexibility' through its CODE revisions, and most importantly, that he would potentially become involved in a new, European-centered anti-doping agency that would not suffer the problems inherent in WADA.

Talk about the love of a minister scorned... remembering that it was J-F Lamour himself, that was the French Minister of Sport and Youth, whose Ministry oversaw the LNDD lab during both the unseemly 'Armstrong case' and the 'Affaire Landis', and whose Ministry was both antagonistic towards the UCI investigation of the Armstrong case, AND was under suspicion during and after these, as a source of the leaks to the journal l'Equipe regarding these and other leaks of 'A Sample' test results.

Other amazing moments came out in a recent (September 18, 2007) interview in Cyclingnews.com, where Patrice Clerc was all over the game board in discussing how offended was his company, the Amaury Sport Organization (ASO), by the attitude and actions of the UCI, with whom the 'Grand Tours' have been battling all the issues surrounding the inception of the ProTour cycling concept, initiatives of the UCI (including this year's UNIBET.com French court case, their (above) exclusion from the Paris-Nice and Tour de France events, and the doping issues.

Unfortunately Monsieur Clerc has no memory, nor apparently any desire to discuss, those endless leaks of doping revelations that stem from the ASO-owned newspaper l'Equipe, the French national sporting journal. Had he been honest with himself and with Cyclingnews.com (who should themselves be hanging their heads for not asking about this issue), he might have addressed these constant leaking incidents, that undermine any Athletes' rights of privacy and process, specifically in the case where l'Equipe published its 2005 article, timed for two weeks after the end of the Tour de France, entitled 'Les Mensonges d'Armstrong', which insinuated that Lance was on EPO in 1999.

And as those leaks came from either the French Ministry (which controls the LNDD laboratory – thus whether that equates with one or two entities is a secondary thought), or WADA, both of whom are key players in the fight against doping in sport, to l'Equipe, there is ample grounds to suspect that there is a bit of 'cover-me, cover-you' corruption that belies the strident WADA message about 'harmonizing the battle against doping in sport': a foundation of the fundamental message found in the Introduction to the WADA CODE.

The practical substance of these revelations, including the great interactions with the French Ministry-sponsored conference, the AFLD second-spin Landis-doping case, the Lamour/Fahey/WADA dénouement, all creating an implosive whirlpool at the very heart, and future, of cycling itself.

But all of the outlined points, above steer us only to the early part of the week; later, on October 25^th, is the usual annual announcement of next year's 2008 Tour de France route. Reading Patrice Clerc's interview, with the discussions of the impossibility of working with the UCI, mentions of national teams and other doping agencies' involvement, leaves the average cycling fan whirling and wondering if all of it is worth the price of sustained interest by the sports-consumer?

Given what you've read above, the amalgam of these events symbolizes something that is bedrock-shattering. A point not to be missed in the evolution of this week is that, unlike many other sports, cycling has had a long history of 'airing its dirty laundry' in public, with every opportunity for the sporting press to make cycling into a laughing stock, while it could be presented legitimately as the one sport that is suffering the most, while undertaking the greatest effort to clean its own ranks.

Soon, members of these entities, present at these meetings, in Paris, Madrid and elsewhere, will have an opportunity to prove their love for cycling, or their love of their own inflated and destructive egos.

Whether they choose to do, that which the world could proudly remember them for their involvement, or that for which the world would sadly remember their involvement, remains to be seen, very soon.

Thus: A MIRROR...

... is the best thing that every participant to these 'Summit' meetings could bring to the table, to remind themselves:

“I am watching my own professional actions, as is the world, for whom I work at this table.”

Watch! WADA
..........@..........WADAwatch

EDITORIAL UPDATE ... on J-F Lamour

Earlier today WADAwatch published the following post:

WADA News FLASH: Lamour candidature apparently dead in the water

Through various news sources, Lamour is credited with 'hinting' at "the possibility of participating in the creation of a "European plan" against doping."

WADAwatch hopes that this is not a display of 'sour grapes', and also hopes that any 'European plan' would be even more transparent, and even more rigorous, than that which is the WADA system as we know it today, and as some fear its transformation in the tomorrows to come.

As a reminder, Jean-François Lamour is the outgoing Vice-President of WADA, a Minister within the Chirac government, and hierarchic supervisor to the thoroughly disastrous LNDD French laboratory, now renamed the AFLD 'département des analyses', with whatever loss of prestige that name-change may implicate.

As always,

Watch! WADA
..........@..........WADAwatch

WADA News FLASH: Lamour candidature apparently dead in the water

Just an update for those of you already with this recent information:

Jean-François Lamour has abruptly chosen to withdraw his candidature to replace outgoing WADA President Dick Pound.

Read (Lang: EN) sources here:

The Globe and Mail:
Ausralian to become world's top anti-doping cop

The French hardline politician expected to succeed Canadian Dick Pound as the world's top anti-doping cop, has opted to stand down and leave the job open for Australia's former finance minister John Fahey.

International Herald Tribune:

L'Equipe says former French sports minister pulling out of race to replace Pound as WADA chief

Former French sports minister Jean-Francois Lamour is dropping out of the running to replace Dick Pound as head of the World Anti-Doping Agency, the sports daily L'Equipe said on its Web site Monday.

Lamour, a WADA vice president once considered the strong favorite to succeed Pound, will not contest the leadership election on Nov. 17 in Madrid, Spain, L'Equipe said.

Lamour decided to withdraw after former Australian finance minister John Fahey entered the race with the support of the United States, New Zealand and Australia.

Lire (Lang: FR) ici:

De L'Equipe:

AMA - Jean-François Lamour va renoncer

Jean-François Lamour, ex-ministre des sports, devrait annoncer demain après-midi lors d'une conférence de presse qu'il va se retirer de la course à la présidence de l'Agence mondiale antidopage (AMA).

Actuellement vice-président de l'institution chargée d'harmoniser au niveau international les règles en matière d'antidopage, le double champion olympique français devait théoriquement être élu président de l'AMA à l'issue de la dernière journée de la prochaine Conférence mondiale sur le dopage organisée à Madrid, le 17 novembre prochain. Mais une candidature de dernière minute de l'Australien John Fahey, ancien ministre des finances de son pays, a contrarié ses plans.

These updated news items make it clear that something is affecting WADA, and it is interesting to further discern what that may be, when reading between the lines of several of Monsieur Lamour's comments.

In one article at l'Equipe, he is interviewed about the candidature of John Fahey. In this interview, he implies that WADA, on the threshold of a newly revised WADA CODE, may not stay as strong in the fight against doping, as it may have been assured with himself at the helm.

Given that his role as WADA Vice President this last year, was the international harmonization of WADA's rules (something which admittedly is a long assignment; perhaps no one could accomplish that in one year's time), and that his entry in the matter stems from his role as French Minister of Sport and Youth...

[and thus hierarchically over the very controversial ex-LNDD, now renamed and functioning as the AFLD 'département of analyses'; also itself infamous due to the irregularity of its professional work experiences, leaks to l'Equipe and chastisements by various International Federations and Arbitration panels]

... whether a WADA, deprived of this man's candidature, is heading for the waterfalls of reality, or has been saved by the abrupt redirection that is offered by a perhaps-more neutral candidature, is to be seen, as WADA moves to Madrid.



More to come as soon as it's available, and remember!

Watch! WADA
..........@..........WADAwatch